Breaking the chains, winning the games, and saving Western Civilization.

Friday, January 2, 2015

Let Help the poor freaks die

Given the Left's stated moral imperative of assisted suicide, it's informative to juxtapose (1) their hand-wringing over a sexually confused boy deciding to kill himself because Mommy and Daddy wouldn't entertain his self-delusions:

The mother of a transgender teen who killed herself over the holiday season is speaking out, and making it clear she did not and does not approve of what she believes was her daughter's choice to be transgender.

Carla Alcorn of Kings Mills, Ohio said in an interview that she and her husband did not 'support' their daughter Leelah Alcorn, while also refusing to acknowledge her daughter's sex, using male pronouns and referring to her as 'him,' 'he' and 'son' throughout the interview.

This just days after Leelah walked in front of a tractor trailer and ended her life, writing in her heartbreaking suicide note that because she was transgender, 'The life I would've lived isn't worth living in.'

Even more upsetting is the fact that she also shares how hopeful she once was in her letter, writing; 'When I was 14, I learned what transgender meant and cried of happiness.'

with (2) their vocal demand for right-to-die legislation.

One of the most vociferous and courageous voices in the campaign to legalise assisted dying was Debbie Purdy, who passed away last week at the age of 51 after refusing food for a year. She had said her hunger strike was painful and difficult, but that her life with progressive multiple sclerosis was ‘unacceptable’.

News of her death came as 80 prominent public figures in the UK called for the legalising of euthanasia here, warning that already one Briton travels abroad every fortnight to euthanasia clinics even as the issue continues to be passionately debated.

If the Left was consistent, it would celebrate those who kill confused individuals who want to die. Not merely permitting, but actively aiding the freaks to die is a moral imperative by their logic. But of course, all they're actually interested in is making use of the situation as a means of rhetorically attacking Christianity.

Denial of reality should never be celebrated, for any reason. Even if one sets religion aside, "Transgenderism" is a denial of basic genetic science. The rhetorically correct response to anyone who claims to believe in "transgenderism" is: "why do you hate science".

There's already a Wikipedia article. Long and extensively footnoted for someone who is otherwise a complete nobody. An interesting contrast to Vox's own entry of similar length, despite his numerous genuine accomplishments. Amazing how SJWs circle the wagons so quickly.

Females have two of the same kind of sex chromosome (XX), and homogametic. Males have two distinct sex chromosomes (XY), and are heterogametic. If you are heterogametic and put on a dress, or chop off your penis, you are not a woman, you are still a man, albeit a man in a dress or sans penis.

This transgender stuff is an eye-opening look at the depth of media groupthink. I don't personally think there's a conspiracy in the sense of some central authority sending out an order telling them what to say every day. I don't suppose the latest version of the AP Stylebook has a new section that says, "Always refer to sexually confused individuals as whatever sex they say they want to be." But somehow, one day the media woke up and all knew that it was time to stop identifying people by the sex assigned by their chromosomes at birth, or even by their genitals, but by their fantasies -- and to be absolutely straight-faced and matter-of-fact about it as if it's no big deal, just the way we talk about these things. Amazing how that happens.

The funny part is that it's bringing back singular personal pronouns. Everyone's spent the last few decades awkwardly using plural pronouns in the place of singular to avoid offending feminists; but I've seen a couple articles on this topic that are just loaded with 'he/him/his' or 'she/her/hers' as if the writer just discovered those words and can't get enough of them.

What's irritating is that many comments on the transgender article accuse the parents of not acting like Christians for being unaccepting their depressed, mentally imbalanced son's insistence that he was a girl. In the same breath they abuse Christianity for being outdated and ignorant. I don't know where to even begin to address the stupidity of their statements.

The leftists and SJW's hating on this mom for denying her son's "right" to dress, behave, and be addressed like a traditional woman, are the same people who hate on moms for teaching their daughters to behave like traditional, feminine, submissive women. They're evil, and stand for deception, death, and chaos.

None of this LGBT crap would be happening, if half the Boomer population hadn't majored in Psychology and created a too full supply of Psych professionals who needed to drum up patients by defining down "deviancy"!!!

Now that this generation is retiring, maybe there is hope for a return to normality?

Generationally, those who reproduce will be there to contest and define the future. Having spent time with my grandson and son-in-law, I am acutely aware that helping them to shape their skills, drive, self-governance, and insight will be my/our contribution to the fight.

Culturally, there is the external and the semi-internal.

Externally warfare with the SJWs and such is Black-Flag. No quarter given nor expected. They are unfamiliar with the concept as they expect shame-and-retreat. When we readily close on them with a knife in our teeth and a gleam in our eyes they break and run.

The semi-internal is the most insidious; Churchians who preach diversity and acceptance.

Come on people a narcisisstic freak and and "IT "? This is how so called Christian men refer to a dead child in a great deal of emotional pain??

Something I think many of you don't understand, it is your precise perversion of Christian values that have led many people in this country to reject your politics and even to reject Christ Himself.

Theology, ideology, intellect, it is all completely meaningless, noting but empty vanity without the love of Christ. So no matter how right you are, no matter what truth may be hidden behind your cynical words, you lose the battle for us all when you revel in the rather unmanly act of kicking dead children.

On the plus side, the trans people are the instigators of a fair amount of internecine warfare within the left. They usually try to claim victim status as 'women', but they don't get on well with the old-guard lesbian radical feminist leaders, and they indulge in frequent victimization point-counting contests with younger SJWs of all stripes. Lately, they seem to be winning those struggles, which might actually be a good thing in the long run.

Why? Their sheer raw craziness makes them less than ideal leaders for their side. Even evil movements need at least some tenuous grasp of reality to function structurally, and letting the looniest of the loonies run things is likely to expose more weaknesses, for those alert enough to exploit them.

I had a pretty good post ready to go tearing that insanitybytes comment down, but then blogspot ate it.

Oh well. At least I had a pretty good chuckle at how insanitybytes asserts that the Christian manosphere is the ideological majority of Christianity, and thus responsible for "many people in this country to reject your politics and even to reject Christ Himself."

We aren't laughing at the mentally unstable child who unfortunately ended his life. We're laughing at the hypocritical idiots saying that suicide should be embraced for the suffering, yet this child suffering from severe mental illness shouldn't be allowed to end his suffering.

Is anyone faimilar with the Southpark episode "Mr Garrison's Fancy new Vagina"? It's absolutely vulgar, but it's also an amazing rhetorical stab at the insanity of transgenderism. A sample (hopefully it formats well):

Mrs. Garrison: You here for an abortion too? [she blinks] Yeah, I discovered a few days ago I wasn't bleedin' out my coo, so I guess I'm knocked up. Is this doctor any good?Nurse: Mrs... Garrison?Mrs. Garrison: Oh, that's me. [rises and follows the nurse in] [Planned Parenthood OR.]Mrs. Garrison: Hello doctor, looks like I need an abortion. [sits on the chair and puts his feet on the stirrups]Doctor: ...an abortion?Mrs. Garrison: Yeah, I've got one growing inside me. Now, are you gonna scramble its brains or just vacuum it out? [a nurse arrives and her jaw drops] ...If you want you can just scramble it and I'll queef it out myself.Doctor: Mmister Garrison-Mrs. Garrison: [correcting him] Mrs. Garrison.Doctor: Mmrs. Garrison, you can't have an abortion.Mrs. Garrison: Don't you tell me what I can and can't do with my body! [gets up, goes to the nurse, and hugs her] A woman has a right to choose!Doctor: No, I mean you're physically unable to have an abortion, because you can't get pergnant.Mrs. Garrison: But I missed my period.Doctor: You can't have periods either. [Mrs. Garrison looks surprised] You had a sex change, Mr. Garrison, but you don't have ovaries or a womb. You don't produce eggs.Mrs. Garrison: [sits down] You mean, I'll never know what it feels like to have a baby growing inside me and then scramble its brains and vacuum it out?Doctor: N-that's right.Mrs. Garrison: But I paid five thousand dollars to be a woman. This would mean I I'm not really a woman. Ih, I'm just a... a I'm just a guy with a mutilated penis!Doctor: Basically, yes.Mrs. Garrison: ...Oh boy, do I feel like a jackass.

The real upsetting thing in all this beyond the loss of life is that she actively made a working man just doing his job kill her. It will always be with him. It will be on his record no matter the circumstance. People at work and friends will always know he killed someone.

Just doing his job and another freak of times just has to bring you and your family into their world of shit. Sick of it.Succession won't work. They must be crushed with no remorse and then the culture correct and policed by righteous men for all time.

Females have two of the same kind of sex chromosome (XX), and homogametic. Males have two distinct sex chromosomes (XY), and are heterogametic... There is no way around this. It is science.

What about those people who have chromosomal abnormalities? For example, transwoman Caroline Cossey, born with two extra X chromosomes. How do we know that the dead teenager wasn't just "confused", but actually had a genetic disorder?

Suicide by train is a pretty well known problem for the railroad. My father-in-law worked as a switchman and saw a lot of it. On one occasion his engine barely missed a man. They stopped the train and confronted him after seeing he was unhurt and the man was expecting some kind of sympathy when confronted. My father-in-law ripped him a new one for putting him and the other trainmen through that . Suicide is an inherently self-centered act. The person can't step outside themselves and view their problems in perspective (self-absorbed is the term that comes to mind) and they don't take into account the people they impact, or they do and they want the damage they know this act leaves in it's wake. If narcissism is a common trait among gay/queer/trans whatever, then it makes sense that they would have comparatively high suicide rate.

I thought insanitybytes22 had a point about some of the phrases used in describing the suicide. IMO, it would be un-Christian to use the phrase "narcissistic freak" in the presence of the suicide's parents, so it is likely not advisable to use it in discussions with other people. But then insanitybytes22 added, "I'm the closest thing you have here to intelligent life." If this was intended as sarcasm, it was poorly executed and attributed, and rather insulting considering insanitybytes22 likely has little personal knowledge of the level of intelligence of the commenters here. The second statement certainly detracted from any point made in the first statement. Perhaps there should be a parable made to apply to these contradictory statements. Perhaps a parable involving lumber, dust motes, and light sensing organs?

"It seems to me it was extraordinarily selfish for him to self-terminate on the front of some guy's tractor trailer. The driver must have been totally traumatized. Or am I the only one who thinks this? "

Robert What, this is what gets me, too. I have some sympathy for the kid's plight, and for suicides in general, but when you force someone else to feel culpable because you are too afraid to pull the trigger yourself, well, my sympathy runs out. God help that poor man that was driving the trailer.

Chromosomal abnormalities also have another more common name, downs syndrome. Trans is not a physical "science" deformity, its purely a mental illness, as is homosexuality, and was classified as such for all of human history until about 30 years ago.

The logic and the conclusion are the truth, mind you. They pretend that they support this and that, or are in fact are this and that. The truth is, if what they hope to bring about in government is ever enacted, it won't be assisted, it will be mandated. Death, that is, for the freaks, the weak, the stupid. Everyone on their fronts lines, and back to the middle, will be slaughtered by what they would create. Both ends of the spectrum, though. This was a law of many kings long before being popularized in populist forms. And, yeah, I think they know it. I guess they are just trying to keep the plot secret, as if history hasn't revealed it hundreds of times already. Bleh.

The science of sex and gender is a little more complicated than what you learned in grade school biology. For example, XY females, such as those with Swyer Syndrome, occur naturally. For what it's worth, I agree with your main point, that assisted suicide is too slippery a slope to be allowed. But, it's.pretty clear you just wanted to gloat, as crassly as possible, about the death of a disturbed adolescent, which is truly vile, and to entertain your core readers, who, judging from their comments, truly deserve to be called freaks.

Anne Morgan, shame on you for using the death of a disturbed adolescent to pop up where you're not wanted, brag about your education and IQ, and negatively judge other human beings whom you consider different than you.

I do not know who Anne Morgan is. Correcting the author's misinformation is not bragging about my own education. Negatively judging people based on their own hate-twisted, self-pitying, circular-reasoning, pseudoscience-embracing words? No shame in that.

"For example, XY females, such as those with Swyer Syndrome, occur naturally."

"Correcting the author's misinformation is not bragging about my own education."

Humans with Swyer Syndrome are XY with a vagina, uterus and Fallopian tubes, but have no functional gonads. They cannot produce eggs or sperm, and have to be prescribed female hormones before they can menstruate and grow breasts. Even then they still can't produce eggs or sperm and are therefore a biological dead end.

You evidently define sufferers of this condition you mentioned, which is estimated to affect only 1 in every 30,0000 people, as being "female," based solely on their plumbing...despite such plumbing not being able to actually produce sex hormones or reproduce. So it would seem that your position (vagina=female, penis=male) is actually less scientifically refined than Vox's.

Regardless, the late teenager who committed suicide didn't have Swyer Syndrome because he had a penis. We know this because his mother saw him as a male with a penis, an observation that doubtless had been reinforced every time she changed his diaper while he was an infant. We can statistically assume he was XY with functioning gonads too, but you've already indicated that such facts would be irrelevant to you because vagina=female and penis=male. You've also already labelled the unfortunate young man as having been "disturbed." So what exactly is your issue with those of us who believe it's wrong to coddle and celebrate delusion and mental illness?

I hope the people here understand that "assisted suicide" is a red herring. What it is really about is the right of doctors and panels of bureaucrats to have the "right" to simply murder you. There is case after case of these animals using flimsy, insane rationalizations to sign off on killing innocent men, women and children who openly begged to live.

And it does not end there. It goes on to forced sterilization (Connecticut, where they sterilized italians, Jews, and blacks. Yes, the United States), open murder (I don't need to explain this), etc.

As I said, xy females are one example of the ways the science of sex and.gender are more.complicated than the author asserted. Obviously, Leelah did not have Swyer Syndrome. If we take.your view, that this was a confused, mentally ill, obviously deeply distraught young man, then do you really need to ask why calling him.a.freak and pandering to readers with nothing but contempt for him is vile?

So are you saying that calling someone a freak or "it" is not contemptuous if accurate? Even if you think it fits, surely you agree that "freak" is pejorative and not usually meant as anything but an insult.

Other guy: I don't remember saying that anyone was worthy of death. I just came here to laugh at Vox Day. Sorry you've had bad Facebook experiences, but I promise that wasn't me. I'm a knowitall for pointing out that VDs "science" is a little off? BTW I think iq is b.s. I just thought it was funny because VD is such a believer in it, and.so proud of his, and, well, mine is, in fact, higher. I know it doesn't mean anything.

Evidence of having an IQ that is beneficial in communicating with others is the ability to read for comprehension and the ability to understand context. If you read here frequently, then you are well aware the author writes on a variety of social issues and intentionally uses words and their literal definitions to demonstrate the absurdity of political correctness and the Orwellian monitoring of words (see "savage"/"half-savage"). If you are not familiar with his writing then your assertion that his choice of words carries a *feeling* is easily viewed and explained as projection.

It might be beneficial for you to use the exceptionally high IQ you been genetically blessed with to learn more about language (and punctuation).

At the moment I am using my genetic blessings, such as they are, to recover from pneumonia. That's my lame excuse for sloppy punctuation. And for being here. Thanks for indulging me. Everyone has been hospitable.As I sloppily tried to explain, I don't think a high i.q. means that I'm particularly bright. Maybe that's why I didn't follow your explanation. (I like to think it's the codeine.) Leelah was literally a freak? That writer lady is literally a savage? So no offense was intended or could be inferred from the context? Is that it? Using the words was intended only to insult people who don't like the words, not the people at whom they were directed? Am I warm? (And sorry about all the arbitrary periods. That's definitely the codeine!)

Absolutely not. In fact, by the context of what was written alone, one would have to infer that Vox has an exceptional level of empathy. That is what you missed while being offended.

Vox correctly identifies the young man using a word that sums up the observable reality. It is then understood that the young man is not normal, healthy, sane or of sound judgement. It can be further understood that if the young man is not of sound mental health, then his decision to end his life is not a rational one made with sound judgement and he should be protected from himself.

If a society first insists that transgenderism is normal, healthy and sane and secondly insists that normal, healthy and sane individuals have a right to die (with assistance from the medical community), then it can be stated that this young man should have had access to this assistance.

His use of the word "freak" serves to protect young men such as this from harming themselves. We can not help those with mental health issues, nor prevent them from getting medical assistance in killing themselves if we call them normal and sane. We can not make an exception to the "right to die" legislation by saying that individuals who are transgender should be denied assistance though they are mentally healthy and sane. So then it is true, this young man should have been aided in his quest to die and celebrated for doing so. Just as Brittany Maynard was.

Using the words was intended only to insult people who don't like the words, not the people at whom they were directed?

It appears the words are used as an aid for people to think. Words have meanings. No author can control a reader's feelings. If a reader is prone to being insulted doesn't it make sense that he should not read that which insults him?

Would you assume someone is of sound mind who wants stoves to not exist because he is unable to stop himself from turning them on and putting his hands on the burner?

As well, it is not wise to attempt to determine an author's motivation and assert it. Like I said before, it is viewed as projection. We know this to be true; if Womanwithhigheriqthanvoxday's uses the word "freak" to describe someone, she is contemptuous of that person.

When you want to know an author's motivation for writing what he has written, here's a tip: ask him.

I think you give Mr. Day way too much credit, but I'll defer to your greater familiarity with his work. If he's always so subtle, why the dumbed-down, completely inaccurate "science"? And, while I oppose assisted suicide, I don't think you're correct to say it is applied to "normal,.sane, healthy" folks. I think it's still just sick people. Also, I'm not sure telling a depressed teen, "Don't kill yourself! You're a freak of nature and that's God's will!" Is the best approach. I think I would go with, "Yeah, nature got the hormones and the genitals and all a bit muddled. We don't know how that works, but if you're sure living a woman is being true to yourself, then fine." We know the Christian counselling, "You're a boy, damn it!" didn't work very well.

See, there you go with that projection again. I'm reading the words that were written and you're saying things were said that were not said.

I'll clarify, when I used the word "healthy" regarding assisted suicide, I should have written "mentally healthy". Yes, I know it is the physically sick that assisted suicide is being celebrated for. Those who commit suicide because of physical health problems that can not be fixed are being celebrated. This young man believed he had a physical health problem that could not be fixed. He could not be changed into what he thought he wanted. If it were scientifically/medically possible to change a human's genetics from XY to XX, then it would also be possible to remove that extra chromosome found in every cell of the individual with Down Syndrome. It's not. And though you want to believe that IQ is bullshit, that extra chromosome often has a severely negative effect on measurable IQ levels and a resulting effect on mental capability and discernment. So much so that society accepts the killing of Down Syndrome babies. It is known in the science/medical community that there is no way to remove the extra chromosome.

Can you demonstrate how the science is inaccurate? Is there a single individual who was born XY who is now XX?

Probably. He does have an odd sense of humor that I don't always understand. However I remember being a reader who could be insulted until I learned that I could apply even my moderate intelligence (I'm a midwit with an ~125 IQ) to utilize logic. In doing so, I have been able to not only not be insulted but, as a woman, have found using reason to be advantageous to my emotional well being and physical health. There aren't many women who come across this blog or VP who make the effort to become more rational thinkers. I hope you consider doing so.

No, of course, chromosomes can't be changed. Day's self-touted logic only works when you accept his shaky definition s. In this case, that a woman can be defined as a human with xx chromosomes and that a man can be defined as a human with xy chromosomes. First, that is false because xy women occur naturally, as do double-y men and other anomalies. The science of sex and gender is more complex: hormonal exposure during fetal development, etc. Also, there are other definitions of man and woman. Whether you accept those definitions or not, it is not logical to argue that they are invalid simply because they do not match the definition you have chosen, without supporting that choice. I'm sure Leelah knew she would always be biologically male. No one talks about "sex change" anymore or about being "transsexual." Now, people say "gender reassignment" or "transgender," because the current understanding that it is gender, not sex, that is the issue.Given Day's weakness for circular reasoning and for arguing from the conclusions of obscure studies, we'll just have agree to disagree on whether he is the best logic tutor.

Trig Palin is in the news again. Remember when he was born? His mom, Sarah Palin, underwent rounds of criticism back then for it. One charge was that she was irresponsible for not "selecting out" a Downs syndrome child. Astonishingly, it was actually argued that letting such a child live is an act of cruelty whose only remedy is abortion. Another charge was that the act of having a Downs syndrome makes all the would-be mothers who aborted their Downs syndrome candidates look and feel bad. So there some kinds of children that you're actually obligated to actively kill, and other kinds of children, such as the transgender case, that you're obligated to actively indulge.

It's becoming hard to keep what's what straight.

And I agree with calicorishev on the crazed groupthink among journalists. This is the second article in as many days about a transgender person, and in both cases the journalist uncritically indulged the transgendered subject, with the unspoken inference that this was the right and proper thing. In both cases, the families of the transgendered disagreed and continued to call a boy what was born as a boy, and in both cases this was portrayed as a wrong.

We are required to indulge these people now, our respectful attendance at their theatrical personal fantasies is now required. Didn't you get the memo?

Well I didn't. And I respectfully decline to participate in the denial of reality, for many reasons. Sadly, the boy who tragically threw himself in front of that tractor trailer was just that, a boy.

Because that's what I meant. They are exceptions and unusual. Day seems to think that his definition is definitive, so to speak. But they exist. There are (a very few) women with xy chromosomes. Are they obligated to live as men? If you mean why did I say anomalies and.not freaks, the answer is that the word freak is no longer accepted to mean anomalies. Like idiot, the accepted usage has changed, because that how language works.

"your core readers, who, judging from their comments, truly deserve to be called freaks."

I think I have this right: you are not a jerk when you refer to us, Vox's core readers, as freaks, but Vox is a jerk when using a very literal definition of the word (a person who acts or dresses in a markedly unconventional or strange way/ a person, animal, or plant that is abnormal) though your usage of the word does not fit any of the actual definitions.

I was referring to the people who made really mean comments. I was wrong. I was right to be disgusted by some of the cruelty, but wrong to call them freaks. But, no,, just because a dictionary definition may (arguably) apply to a particular case, it does.not mean it is always okay to use (lousy sentence, I know). That's not political correctness; that's basic decency. It's not clever or witty to say, "how's your Mongoloid baby? What? That's what it's called. Look it up!" and.it's not bravely defiant to call a deeply.distraught teenager a "freak." It's juvenile and nasty.

The use of rhetoric, in this case hyperbole, is very useful in demonstrating the inconsistencies and hypocrisy found in liberal society today. If those who advocate for assisted suicide, do not believe it is right for this young male, they can't truly believe either a) in the right for a sane individual to determine when they should die or b) that identifying as a transgender is sane.

I agree this young man was deeply distraught, perhaps the reason for it is not because his parents wouldn't acquiesce to his requests but because our society pretends to call that which is an anomaly, normal/healthy/acceptable, and therefore denied the help he needed to deal with his capricious tendencies or whims.

As I said, I don't agree with assisted suicide, but this kind of cheap, pandering rhetoric is vile. Anyone who can't see that is a moral idiot. You're better than that. I suspect that you know I'm right, but choose to defend it out of loyalty.

What the heck kind of logic is that? How on earth do you go from this Vox calling deeply confused kids names (to make a point!).to God calling certain things abominations? Do you really not see that mocking the afflicted is a sin?

"Day's self-touted logic only works when you accept his shaky definitions. In this case, that a woman can be defined as a human with xx chromosomes and that a man can be defined as a human with xy chromosomes. First, that is false because xy women occur naturally, as do double-y men and other anomalies. The science of sex and gender is more complex: hormonal exposure during fetal development, etc.

Also, there are other definitions of man and woman. Whether you accept those definitions or not, it is not logical to argue that they are invalid simply because they do not match the definition you have chosen, without supporting that choice."

And yet here you are still trying to logically argue that Vox's defintion of man and woman is invalid. You have not presented us with your own choice of defintion, let alone supported that choice, despite lecturing the rest of us on the importance of doing do. You say that Vox's definition that female=XX is wrong because "XY women occur." Who says they are women, and by what definition? Is it your definition? Or is it just because you say so? I can't say your definitions is right or wrong because you haven't presented one. And you're the one complaining about circular logic, and talking about lack of education. Are you afraid to present a definition because then you would be subject to the same criticism you've directed at our host, whom you've publicly claimed as having a lower IQ than you?

Or perhaps you don't have a definition, and are just arguing for ignorance and confusion and playing word game?. You don't know what a man or a woman is, and so therefore no one else can know, is that it? That would be an interesting point of view if you're a Christian as you seem to infer. If no one knows what a man or woman is is, how do we know who's scriptural prohibited from "lying with a man as with a woman." Or maybe that's your underlying motivation...

Females have two of the same kind of sex chromosome (XX), and homogametic. Males have two distinct sex chromosomes (XY), and are heterogametic. If you are heterogametic and put on a dress, or chop off your penis, you are not a woman, you are still a man, albeit a man in a dress or sans penis.

There is no way around this. It is science. - Vox's science (as well as...most everyone)

I'm a knowitall for pointing out that VDs "science" is a little off? - Womanwithhigheriqthanvoxday's

She reveals that it is not Vox's science that she disagrees with at all. In fact anything that deviates from what Vox states is a man or a woman she uses many more words to describe: deeply confused, afflicted, anomalies, exceptions, unusual.

For something to be an exception, doesn't there have to be a rule?For something to be unusual, doesn't there have to be a usual?

She used the "Vox's science is a little off" as a means to cover her projection. Vox's use of the word "freak" elicited in her an emotional reaction due to her own internal challenges with individuals whose gender identity deviates from the norm. In essence, she believes them to be freaks but has been told it is wrong to have that reaction and her brain can not reconcile the two. She is also very upset that there are people who don't have this internal conflict.

It is just like a very common occurrence that happens here in white libertopia when it comes to the increasing violence going on in our more vibrant sections of town. The SJW's get so angry with themselves when they emotionally respond with very bad words describing the individuals who are "not appreciating them for their help in fighting white privilege and are committing crimes against them."

SD, are you saying that I find trans women odd, but that I don't want to be mean about it or let others be mean about it? And that's bad?

And, yes, I said.many times that Day's definition is typical, as everyone knows. The exceptions are only significant here because they clearly demonstrate that there are OTHER factors. One that are being studied by scientists. Scientists who are not anti-science. So he is incorrect, which only matters because he is being a smug blowhard and because he built his whole argument around it.My points were pretty straightforward. I get the impression you were arguing them only because you want me to be some representation of the straw-man feminist or assisted suicide proponent or SJW or something.

Sir T,That's a fair point. Actually, I don't know enough to make the determination in those rare, but philosophically pesky, instances where there's a real.question. I doubt anyone but God does. So, I would be inclined to let the unfortunate individuals make the call themselves.. How a person feels might seem too subjective, but there is reason to believe it reflects things like brain chemistry that we really don't understand. Psychology alone can't explain people who deeply feel, their whole lives, that they are women, when everyone has always told them otherwise. Why make someone suffer when science really can't say? Because it seems to go against God's plan? First, it may not: it may be the equivalent of any other birth defect. Second, even if it does, we have to allow people to choose for themselves. We allow people to worship Vishnu or play cards on Sundays or venerate icons or whatever we think is wrong, because, at some point, people have to.follow their.own.consciences and take the.consequences.And, yes, xy women are generally accepted to be women. Double-y men are clearly men, even though they don't fit Vox's definition: they have normal genitals, father children, have all the secondary characteristics (beards, etc).I don't understand what you.are implying with that last sentence. That I want to marry a trans man? That I want people to unknowingly sleep with the.transgendered? We're you just trying to make a nasty innuendo?Like our illustrious host, I am no final.authority. I could be.way.off, but you asked.for my opinion. What's yours?

Huh? I didn't follow any of that. Of course, I know can't stop people from saying mean things. I think it's clear I mean let people do so without objection from me. Why are you so consistently. offended that I object to calling vulnerable people names that are.obviously intended to hurt and diminish. Would you *let* your children do so? Call a person with birth defects a freak.or person with a mental disability a retard?Mine know better, but if they did it, they would be in serious trouble.

For anyone keeping score: yes, I'm a Christian (Anglican), yes, I'm a feminist (obs not the TERF kind!), no, I don't support suicide or assisted suicide, not entirely clear on what an sjw is, but I don't think I am one. No, I don't think iq means anything at all. No, I have never posted here under another name and.don't plan.to post here again after this discussion.

I'm in no position to judge typos! Christmas iPad + pneumonia=very weird stuff, indeed! I assumed it was autocorrect!Disheartened? I'm sorry to hear that. I thought it was a good discussion and.I appreciate you sharing your thoughts. I had hoped increase my understanding, but probably spent most of my time trying and failing to clarify my views. Were you hoping to convince me.of something that I missed? That Vox Day is the Jonathan Swift of our times and I'm just too prickly and.thin-skinned to appreciate him? Haha. That's entirely possible!

You know, I like to keep track of such statements. So far there has been exactly one woman who has said so, and actually followed through (Signe/Sigyn). Let's just say that I'm not holding my breath waiting for the second miracle.

We used to prevent our children from saying words like "fuck you" to each other when they were angry. They would then, obeying the letter of the law, say words like "f you" or "screw you". There heart was the same in each instance. We, as parents, realized our error and began instructing them on calming their spirit and respecting one another within our family. When their heart was wrong, their recourse would be to pray, go away to be alone, and rejoin the family when they had reached a calm. They were, by no means, permitted to express the ugliness in their heart to one another.

There is no difference in the word "freak" or "anomaly", or "afflicted", or "deeply confused" when the heart of the person remains the same. I thought you'd start to understand that what with your high IQ and all.

My heart aches for those who are lost and without the peace and hope available in obedience to God. It makes no difference to me if they wear women's clothing, cut off their penises, eat SSRI's like they are candy, weigh 300lbs, have sex with those of their same gender - it's all the same ache. I will not call evil, good - ever. As an example, in personal conversations with my best childhood friend who is living as a lesbian, I have expressed this very thing to her. What you are missing and what I have witnessed is that the afflicted, the freaks, the lost, are looking for hope and they will never find that without Truth and the Truth will never be known if we use words washed with political correctness and fake kindness. This young man would have fared far better had he spent some time reading Vox call him a freak and tell him how to find Hope and Truth than he did in the world of political correctness and pandering to that which God calls an abomination.

Maybe now.Day will realize.that iq is meaningless! You know that not all transgender people are interested in sex with the the gender opposite to that of.their birth.sex. I actually knew someone who was born a man, lived as a man, married, transitioned, as they say, and.stayed with his, now her, wife.I have no idea what happened to the penis, if there was.surgery or not; that's not my business. They seemed happy. It certainly does.take.all kinds.

"Day would have been.burned at the stake in any Christian society he would actually approve."

So it's wrong to indirectly call an actual freak a freak, even if he's already dead and can't possibly be offended by it? But directly calling the commentators here freaks where we can read it, that's is not so wrong because it's just a typical expression of a woman's strong emotion, right? And the same goes for saying Vox's behavior is vile, calling him a heretic, and saying he would have been burned alive in a traditional Christian society?

You're so tolerant, sensitive, and caring, WWHIQTVD. Except when you're not. And for all your dislike of Vox and some of the commentators here, you've still done little more than just hop up and down on on foot while proclaiming "You're wrong!" I echo Markku's sentiment- I hope you keep your word about leaving and not comming back.

"Vox's use of the word "freak" elicited in her an emotional reaction due to her own internal challenges with individuals whose gender identity deviates from the norm. In essence, she believes them to be freaks but has been told it is wrong to have that reaction and her brain can not reconcile the two. She is also very upset that there are people who don't have this internal conflict.

Very well put! I imagine this is the same conflict some female government employees at my old job had when a 40-something, recently-divorced father of two, standing 6'4" in pumps and a dress, decided that since he'd embraced womanhood it would be best for him to use the women's restrooms.

After management realized he was a contractor rather than an actual government employee, and that it would be cheaper to replace him than build a unisex bathroom...well, he disappeared real quickly. I never heard a single employee express regret about it either. So much for political correctness :)

Sir T, I said I was wrong to call those posters freaks. I was wrong. I said it twice in a reply to someone else and.I'm saying it here. Vox Day is actually a heretic. That's a legitimate description, not a slur. It's just a fact that he would have been burned at the stake for it in pre-modern Europe. I'm not the one who's nostalgic for such things. I would probably have been burned myself, but not for denying the Trinity.I don't believe I ever said I was sensitive, tolerant or caring. And, yes, I promise never to return after this discussion is concluded. You will all be able to resume giving Mr Day the narcissistic supply he so desperately needs without any heckling from this particular peanut gallery.

Markku, I hope.that next time a dissenting voice appears you will accuse her of being me. "You're that woman with a higher iq than Vox Day's aren't you? Admit it!"As delightful as you all are, she will not be me. Vox is hilariously ridiculous in small doses. Small, small doses.